Make partition history

The much vaunted “Make partiton history” rally happened in Dublin yesterday. The event was supposedly the centrepiece of Sinn Fein`s Cead Bliain centenary celebrations. Some interesting comment on Boards.ie regarding the parade in the wake of scathing comments by Labour`s Pat Rabbite, accusing Sinn Fein and this rally in particular, of promoting inter-communal hostility in the North. Republican Sinn Fein were also to hold an alternative rally at the GPO.

Who cares?, it happened in Dublin which is the capital of a foreign country.

Denny Boy

Ulsterman

“Who cares?, it happened in Dublin which is the capital of a foreign country.”

You’ll have been unmoved by the plight of New Orleans then, and of course the ongoing slaughter in Baghdad, the latter being the capital of a forign country.

ch in dallas

I’ll say one thing for you ulsterman, you’re not wishy-washy! You’d make a fine Texan. (That was meant as a compliment)

ulsterman

Those foreign capitals have not spent centuries trying to defeat the Ulster Protestant through every devious means at their disposal.

Dublin, the Pope and SF will soon realise that their so called decomissining has been for nothing. SF will never again be in power at Stormont. It is the DUP that are in control now.

No Surrender and No compromise ever.

Keith M

I’m no fan of deputy Rabbitte (he really should be a cartoon character with that name) but he’s right on the money on this. He rarely makes comments on Northern Ireland, but it’s good to see him putting some space between his party and SF/IRA.

As for the comments on borads.ie, these would generally reflect opinion of the vast majority of Dubliners. We don’t want hate marches in our city, thank you very much. It only serves to show how out of touch SF/IRA with public opinion in this country anmd shows whgy their support has been dipping in recent polls.

Shay Begorrah

Reading boards.ie is seldom edifying but you would have to say the criticism of the march was pretty juvenile stuff (boiling down to “people I disagree with should not be allowed to march”.)

On a not completely tangential note I have been on Palestinian Solidarity marches where you get over enthusiatic kids (who are hopefully just ignorant) shouting anti-Jewish slogans. It is toe curling stuff but it does not reduce everyone on the march to an anti-semite by association. Same deal with the apparent “KilL Kill Kill The RUC!” chants that some posters said they had heard. Not everyone gets the message immediately – I think the apprentice boys would agree that even in a well organised march you get some troublemakers on a day out.

Shay “On a not completely tangential note I have been on Palestinian Solidarity marches where you get over enthusiatic kids (who are hopefully just ignorant) shouting anti-Jewish slogans. It is toe curling stuff but it does not reduce everyone on the march to an anti-semite by association.”

No only those that continue to march beside these children and don’t ask them to stop.

On a more general note, I believe that allowing political demonstrations that choke our streets is one thing, allowing children on these demonstrations is another. It’s apalling to see young children used as fodder to swell the numbers on these demonstrations. It is a insidious form of child abuse and any organisation that allows children to be used like this should has to my mind forfeited the right of peaceful demonstration.

Brian Boru

Keith M, while I won’t be voting SF at the next Southern General Election, I think it’s wishful thinking on your part to talk about SF support “dipping”, considering they are on 10% in the national opinion-polls. They were absolutely crucified by the Southern media and still won 12% in the Euro and local elections, and got 12% in the Meath by-election. Considering that 32% is Gerry Adams’ approval-rating in the polls, I would calculate that the party still has considerable scope for growth in the South, largely at FF’s expense.

“Those foreign capitals have not spent centuries trying to defeat the Ulster Protestant through every devious means at their disposal.

Dublin, the Pope and SF will soon realise that their so called decomissining has been for nothing. SF will never again be in power at Stormont. It is the DUP that are in control now.

No Surrender and No compromise ever. “

Ulsterman, you should try looking at things from other peoples’ point of view instead of being so introverted. The Pope has nothing to do with NI and has no political-power outside of the Vatican. Also, you are showing contempt for democracy because the pro-GFA parties have the vast majority of the vote in NI – even now. The GFA itself won 71% support in the North and 95% support in the south. Democracy demands that this democratically-expressed will be implemented.

Anyway, it was your side that started the aggression not us.

Alan2

“The GFA itself won 71% support in the North and 95% support in the south. Democracy demands that this democratically-expressed will be implemented.”

Firstly the second figure counts for nothing except moral support for the agreement and agreement to amend the Irish constitution. Secondly do you think 71% would vote that way today? For peace most certainly, 95% plus but not necessarily for the GFA.

Brian Boru

Alan2 your people are going to have to snap out of this supremacist and introverted mindset. Stop being so paranoid. Broken record-players…

Keith M

BB, as Alan has said, the figure you quote for the Republic is not support for the Agreement, just the clauses that affected this country (the claim on Northern Ireland and cross-border bodies).

Secondly, the 71% for N.I., did not have a majpority of unionists, and since then unionists have voted increasing for anti-Agreement candidates. You’ve got to accept that the agreement is dead, it’s called “parity of esteem” it was your side that started that.

Levitas

Glancing over the usual bilious spleen-laden invective in the South’s Sunday Press I get the impression that the majority of the articles about the “Make Partition History” contained the following earth shattering “insights”

2) A Historic pageant which includes scenes from the Easter Uprising featured people dressed up in military uniforms….”is this legal?”

3) There were lots of people there so much so that it delayed traffic and upset “tourists”..none of whom are named and whose quotes include innocuous inanities such as “its surprising how much support Sinn Fein is getting”

4) There were so many people there that it was only attended by 4000 people , yet it brought Dublin to a halt….sometimes you can not have it both ways….

I confidently expect a deluge of similar bile as the political enormity of the IRA’s autonomous decommisioning sinks into the pro-partitionist establishments both North and South of the “border”.

zl in Denver

Ulsterman has shown himself to be content with simplistic and arrogant statements (they can hardly be called arguments) as well as being unable to move beyond the cry of “no surrender”. I’m sure this was fine during the siege of LondonDerry, but which seems a bit antiquated since the principle of consent and the GFA. Indeed he would make a fine Texan. If only he could try dumbing down his English a little bit more and substitute “Evil doers” for “Dublin, the Pope and SF” we might even elect him president. Though I hope that the majority of people in NI and the world over regardless of their position on the constitutional question will be happy to hear that the rifles of the IRA have fallen silent for good.

On the parade and criticisms thereof, which largely seem to center on people stating that SF are out of touch with the Southern electorate. The parade itself strikes me as nothing new only a larger version of many republican events in which SF asserts its total monopoly of the republican movement and reassure its grass roots of the fact that it’s still a militant organization when at the same time it’s getting rid of the guns. While it may be distasteful to see people posing with replica rifles I find it far better than the alternative which is republicans posing with the real thing (though of course like many it would simply be nice to see all militarism removed from politics though I doubt FF would be willing to facilitate that through a name change).

The truth is that the post GFA SF electorate has increased in large part due to their policies on the ground in which SF reps live in their constituencies and work damn hard at addressing the issues that are relevant. And while many (my self included) will admit that their PR and ability to milk a constitution crisis is both impressive and at times sickening I doubt whether that explains away the SF vote in the South.

I think Mick was right when he posted on another thread that it would probably take another two election cycles before SF finds it feet in the South, but to state that the “make partition history” parade shows how out of touch SF is would do well to remember the caravans of tri-colours driving all over hell and back in NI at the announcement of the ceasefire and how upset that made many.

Also when it comes to the people making the comments I hardly need to point out the obvious. Seriously though does anyone whose followed SF’s progress since the GFA really think that SF is in a time warp? And while “a grotesque pageant of political necrophilia” makes a great sound bite I would remind Mr. McDowell that his coalition partner must then share that dubious title when they commemorate Wolfe Tone. Unless of course political violence without a democratic mandate is acceptable when a) it’s successful or b) it’s unsuccessful but was so long ago as to enter into collective myth.

No one can deny the crass cynical manipulation which SF is capable of but by the inflammatory language used by both the PDs and Rabbitte you would have thought that Martin Ferris was dealing smack in Kerry and Mary Lou MacDonald was making improper propositions to gentlemen callers. I mean come on how on point can any article be when it calls a politician “brave” for running their mouth?

ulsterman

Election results do change. The 1998 referendum was never accepted by a majority of Unionists. The Papists did accept it even though it copper fastened the Union forever.

Paisley is in the driving seat as the voice of Unionism. The UUP is heading for oblivion. The trust of the Ulster people has been placed in Paisley and the DUP.

SF are a bunch of hoods and thugs. No deal will ever be done with them.

It is ironic though that SF are the ones wishing to become British ministers at Stormont.

But speaking as someone who grew up in a Presbyterian family in East Antrim I am, frankly, embarrassed and depressed that the opinions you express are held by people in this country.

Mr Paisley may well be in a driving seat somewhere but does he have any idea whatsoever where he is going and how he will get there ?

ch in dallas

Ulsterman, zl in denver talks real purty, don’t he? I’m not saying I either or agree or disagree with you, not my fight, but I like your no non-sense language. No poly-latinate words that border on verbal masturbation. If everyone in Ireland said what they meant, the troubles might be over quicker. But, c’est la guerre, oops, I meant, smoke’em out,an go git’em.

maca

What I want to know is when will ‘Ulsterman’ be decommissioned? He reminds me of Noel Ginnity, someone who is just no longer funny [was he ever?] and you’d wish he would just give up.

Gerry Lvs Castro

MAKE SINN FEIN HISTORY

Ship them all off to Cuba and North Korea where they can have a rare oul time swopping marxist anecdotes and pretending that they really aren’t a bunch of murderous sectarian bigots intent on plunging the island of Ireland into yet another horrible phase of jack-booted thuggery.

maca

GLC If you send the DUP also i’ll make a contribution to the air fares.

Brian Boru

“Secondly, the 71% for N.I., did not have a majpority of unionists, and since then unionists have voted increasing for anti-Agreement candidates. You’ve got to accept that the agreement is dead, it’s called “parity of esteem” it was your side that started that. “

The Unionist parties – PUP and UUP that supported the GFA won the majority of Unionist seats in 1998. The reason pro-Agreement Unionists had no majority in the Assembly is because of anti-Agreement MLA’s getting onto the party-ballot, meaning – ironically – that some anti-Agreement MLAs were elected by pro-Agreement votes. Also, exit polls on the day of the referendum indicated that 55% of Protestants had voted for the GFA.

You are obviously excluding Alliance voters from your calculations. Most of their vote is Protestant so that has to be included to, bringing the Unionist vote for the GFA higher than the gap between the pro-Agreement Unionist parties and the anti-Agreement ones. So you are wrong.

Anyway, a referendum is not the same as elections, which are held every few years. Referendums are more permanent affairs.

Also, the GFA contains a “review” mechanism allowing for changes to be made to the GFA. Using this mechanism may provide a solution whereby the DUP’s opposition to the Agreement and the pro-Agreement parties’ support for it can be reconciled.

The Troll

this goes goes to show up the terrorist harbourers and appeasers in the Irish Rebublic. All rebulicans , activists or supporters should be lined up against a wall and shot.

Keith M

Brian Boru “The Unionist parties – PUP and UUP that supported the GFA won the majority of Unionist seats in 1998.” However when you and the UKUP, Independent Unionists and anti-Agreement Unionists within the UUP, the majority of Unionists MLA were anti-Agreement.

“The reason pro-Agreement Unionists had no majority in the Assembly is because of anti-Agreement MLA’s getting onto the party-ballot, meaning – ironically – that some anti-Agreement MLAs were elected by pro-Agreement votes.”

No nsense. People who voted for people like Donaldson knew that they were against the Agreement. “The public gets what the public wants”.

“Also, exit polls on the day of the referendum indicated that 55% of Protestants had voted for the GFA.” Completly irrelevant. I am talking about unionists.

“You are obviously excluding Alliance voters from your calculations. Most of their vote is Protestant so that has to be included to, bringing the Unionist vote for the GFA higher than the gap between the pro-Agreement Unionist parties and the anti-Agreement ones. So you are wrong.” No unlike you I am not into section head counts. The people who vote APNI cannot be called unionists. They had the choice of voting for Unionists and chose not to. The only people who can be called unionists are those that vote for unionist parties and a majority of unionists did not support the agreement. This is however now clearly irrelevant, the vast majority of unionists now vote for candidates who opposed the agreement.

“Also, the GFA contains a “review” mechanism allowing for changes to be made to the GFA. Using this mechanism may provide a solution whereby the DUP’s opposition to the Agreement and the pro-Agreement parties’ support for it can be reconciled.” We went down that road three years ago, and nothing could be salvaged. Let’s face facts, the agreement is head and only a comprehensive new agreement enjoying support with unionists and nationalists can restore local democracy. Should such an agreement prove impossiblke (which it may well do), then other options which enjoy cross community support need to be explored.

Obvious

Ulsterman is a troll. This has been established repeatedly here since time out of mind. Needle him enough and he starts coming out with the republican bile he actually believes. Thank you.

Robert Keogh

Brian Boru,

who cares if a majority of unionists did or did not vote for the GFA? It is entirely irrelevant – the electorate of NI overwhelmingly endorsed the GFA. Fullstop.

Everyone who remembers unionism from the 70s and 80s know this is precisely the yardstick they demanded be applied. Just another instance of goal post shifting by unionism.

Man Farang

Ulsterman Who cares?It happened in Dublin,which was the birthplace of Edward Carson.

maca

Keith “The only people who can be called unionists are those that vote for unionist parties”

Well that’s not quite true is it. Surely supporting the union makes you unionist, whether you vote or not. So your point would be more accurate as: “the vast majority of unionists [who vote] now vote for candidates who opposed the agreement.”

Sharon

The Republican Sinn Fein Rally at the GPO was not an “alternative” to the PSF march – it was the continuation of an event which has been held on the eve of the all-Ireland final since the 1950’s !

Sharon.

red kangaroo

Keith “The only people who can be called unionists are those that vote for unionist parties” If the only people who can be called Unionist are those that vote for Unionist parties then it seems Unionist are very much a minority of the NI electorate. Could somebody please remind us what % of the total electorate (including non voters) actually voted for Unionist parties and the DUP in particular Dallas “Ulsterman, zl in denver talks real purty, don’t he? I’m not saying I either or agree or disagree with you, not my fight, but I like your no non-sense language. No poly-latinate words that border on verbal masturbation. If everyone in Ireland said what they meant, the troubles might be over quicker. But, c’est la guerre, oops, I meant, smoke’em out,an go git’em.”

Pity you didn’t seem to like it when on a different thread I made a few observations on the failed society you live in. If everone in the world really said what they meant re the USA all the world’s troubles might be over quicker

Gerry Lvs Castro

”GLC If you send the DUP also i’ll make a contribution to the air fares.”

Do you know Maca I think we’ve got a deal.

Keith M

Robert K “who cares if a majority of unionists did or did not vote for the GFA? It is entirely irrelevant – the electorate of NI overwhelmingly endorsed the GFA. Fullstop.” It is anything but irrelevant. We repeatedly hear the mantas of “an inclusive agreement” and “parity of esteem”. If these phrases are to mean anything it must mean that for anything to work in N.I. it must have the support of the majority of unionists. If you want to have “majority rule” we could have the old Stormont back in the morning.

red kangaroo “If the only people who can be called Unionist are those that vote for Unionist parties then it seems Unionist are very much a minority of the NI electorate.” You are confusing two things, those that vote Unionist and those that are pro-Union. There are many people who support N.I.’s position within the U.K. and vote APNI, and some that even vote SDLP and SF/IRA (though very few of the latter). Check any opinion poll to verify this. The only way to judge the level of “pro-Union” support is a referendum on the constitutional status of Northern Ireland. The last time such a poll was held over 90% of those that voted were pro-Union, although this figure was probably inflated by a boycott of the democratic process by nationalists.

red kangaroo

Keith – – red kangaroo “If the only people who can be called Unionist are those that vote for Unionist parties then it seems Unionist are very much a minority of the NI electorate.” You are confusing two things, those that vote Unionist and those that are pro-Union. There are many people who support N.I.’s position within the U.K. and vote APNI, and some that even vote SDLP and SF/IRA (though very few of the latter). Check any opinion poll to verify this. The only way to judge the level of “pro-Union” support is a referendum on the constitutional status of Northern Ireland. The last time such a poll was held over 90% of those that voted were pro-Union, although this figure was probably inflated by a boycott of the democratic process by nationalists.

Keith I was quoting you. I personally have no doubt that a border poll would favout the union. You however decided when arguing that a majority of unionists oppossed the GFA that the definition of a unionist was and I quote

“The only people who can be called unionists are those that vote for unionist parties”

So are you now denying your previous thread and conceeding that a majority of unionists supported the GFA?

Henry94

ouch!

Keith M

red kangaroo. I believe it is very clear that a majority of Unionists never voted for the Belfast Agreement. As I said previously, rthis is however nmow nothing biut a debating point. The agreement is dead, hopfully the lessons have been leant and any any new agreement must have the support of both nationalists and unionists.

red kangaroo

Keith “I believe it is very clear that a majority of Unionists never voted for the Belfast Agreement.”

Why should facts ever be relevant in a discussion on NI? Stupis me. I guess we all believe in some fantasies but the difference between most people and DUPers seems to be DUPer’s live in their own reality. Shame the rest of the world has to watch while they live it though.

Henry94

KiethM

The Agreemeet is not dead. The institutions will be restored and the provisions will be implemented. Even the DUP don’t seriously expect a new agreement. Their big problem which is, how to go into power-sharing when a sizebable section of your voters are against it, would not be helped by a new agreement.

red kangaroo

anyway seems we have all been guilty of straying from the post (what’s new?) Re Pat Rabbite I think he raises valid points re SF commitment to genuine Irish unity. Is SF a party seriously committed to unity or is it a tribal triumphilist party like both the DUP and the UUP?

Keith M

red kangaroo “Why should facts ever be relevant in a discussion on NI?” Because if people continue to believe the myth that unionist supported the agreement, they are likely to make the same mistake again and introduce another “agreement” that does not have cross community support.

One of the few decent idea that Mo Mowlam had when she was secretary SoS, was that unionists would vote on one coloured ballot papers and nationalists on another in the referendum.

ch in dallas

Note to readers of this thread, Ch in dallas here. Early in the thread I praised UM for for word choice. That was only on his original blogg.I didn’t realize that later he went nuclear and anti-Catholic. I’m Catholic myself. As an American and a Texan, I feel that I’m an ambassador for my state and country, and don’t want to associate myself with xenophobic or anti-catholic comments. My bad.. I didn’t fully follow the thread. I’m asking for a mulligan on this one. Forgive sp. I’m at work. 🙂

ulsterman

If people do not believe the agreement is dead watch this space. It is totally dead. There is no way in this world that the DUP will negotiate with the enemies of Ulster.

Tochais Síoraí

I think partition will be history some day. When I don’t know, but I’m pretty sure that the IRA and Sinn Féin have delayed it. The Make Partition history ‘campaign’ is little more than a sweetie for those among them who are having difficulty with current events. If they were more interested in a UI rather than power in NI, the prisoners could’ve stayed in Long Kesh a while longer and there’d have been more cross border bodies with exec powers in the GFA.

willowfield

The Provos support partition. They aren’t opposed to borders – they just want to move the existing border between ROI and UK.

IJP

They aren’t opposed to borders – they just want to move the existing border between ROI and UK.

That’s a very important point.

The issue is not whether there should be a border, but where the border between the British and Irish states should be placed.

For too long, Irish Nationalists have gotten away with the line ‘removing the border’.

I can see Scotland from my window as I type – I no more see why there should be a border between me and there than I do between me and Dundalk.

That is the challenge for Irish Nationalists – why should the border be moved? It’s easy to get caught up in one’s own propaganda.

George

IJP, you can see Wales from the Dublin mountains on a clear day. Doesn’t mean I believe there shouldn’t be a border between us. Just like the Germans in Frankfurt am Oder don’t consider themselves Polish, I suppose.

Those obsessed with borders on this island virtually all live north of the only one we have and call themselves unionists and nationalists.

Most people south of the border live their lives without giving the slightest thought to the border, never mind removing it.

They are probably the only ones on this island asking the question you want asked: why the border should be moved.

They want to live in peace, voted for the GFA because they want peace and want unionists to be content because they want peace. All done fro selfish reasons rather than part of some great nationalist plan.

You say for too long, Irish Nationalists have gotten away with the line ‘removing the border’, I say Unionists have gotten away for too long with the line “maintaining the union”.

Both are the same to me. Neither are looking for peace, prosperity and growth, both are looking for victory.

True, the challenge for northern nationalists today isn’t to show why the border should be moved, rather the challenge is to see can peace, prosperity and growth be achieved with it in place.

If it can’t, then it is only natural that more and more questions will be asked about allowing Britain to continue running the place.

The challenge for unionists isn’t to show why the border should remain, rather to see can peace, prosperity and growth be achieved with it in place.

If it can, then there will be fewer and fewer questions about remaining part of the union.

I really want to know if the union can finally deliver for its Irish minority after 204 years. Yes, they have had that long to win them over.

If it can’t, I really want to know if the Irish Republic can deliver for a potential British minority.